[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 133 (Friday, July 11, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41407-41408]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-17579]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. STN 50-528, STN 50-529, STN 50-530]


Arizona Public Service Company, et al.: Palo Verde Nuclear 
Generating Station, Units 1, 2 and 3; Environmental Assessment and 
Finding of No Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering 
issuance of an amendment to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 
(10 CFR) part 50, for Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-41, NPF-51, 
NPF-74, issued to Arizona Public Service Company (the licensee), for 
operation of the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station (PVNGS), Units 
1, 2, and 3, located in Maricopa County, Arizona. Therefore, as 
required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is issuing this environmental 
assessment and finding of no significant impact.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would extend the expiration date of the 
operating license from December 31, 2024, to June 1, 2025, for Unit 1; 
from December 9, 2025, to April 24, 2026, for Unit 2; and from March 
25, 2027, to November 25, 2027, for Unit 3.
    The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
application dated August 28, 2002.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would allow the licensee to operate PVNGS, 
Units 1, 2, and 3, until June 1, 2025, April 24, 2026, and November 25, 
2027, respectively. This would allow the licensee to recapture 
approximately six months of additional plant operation for each unit.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The NRC has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and 
concludes that there are no significant environmental considerations 
involved with the proposed action. The extension of the operating 
licenses does not affect the design or operation of the plants, does 
not involve any modifications to the plants or any increase in the 
licensed power for the plants, and will not create any new or 
unreviewed environmental impacts that were not considered in the Final 
Environmental Statement (FES) related to the operation of PVNGS, Units 
1, 2, and 3, NUREG-0841, dated February 1982. The evaluations presented 
in the FES were the environmental impacts of generating power at PVNGS 
and the basis for granting a 40-year operating license for PVNGS. The 
environmental impacts of the proposed action are based on the 
evaluations in the FES. The FES also considered the environmental 
impacts of operating Units 1, 2, and 3.
    The FES which in general, assesses various impacts associated with 
operation of the facility in terms of annual impacts and balances these 
against the anticipated annual energy production benefits.
    The offsite exposure from releases during postulated accidents has 
been previously evaluated in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report 
(UFSAR) for PVNGS. The results are acceptable when compared with the 
criteria defined in 10 CFR part 100, as documented in the Commission's 
Safety Evaluation Report, NUREG-0857, dated November 1981, and its 12 
supplements.
    This conservative design-basis evaluation is a function of four 
parameters: (1) The type of accident postulated, (2) the radioactivity 
calculated to be released during the accident, (3) the assumed 
meteorological conditions at the site, and (4) the population 
distribution versus distance from the plant. An environmental 
assessment of accidents is also provided in section 5.9.2 of the FES. 
The type of accidents and the calculated radioactivity released do not 
change with the proposed action. The site meteorology as defined in 
Chapter 2 of the UFSAR is essentially constant. The NRC staff has 
concluded that the population size and distribution will not change 
significantly.
    The NRC staff has concluded that the impacts associated with the 
addition of approximately six to eight months to each unit are not 
significantly different from operating license duration assessed in the 
PVNGS FES. Therefore, the staff concluded that the FES sufficiently 
addresses the environmental impacts associated with a full 40-year 
operating period for each unit.
    The annual occupational exposure of workers at the plant, station 
employees and contractors, is reported in the Annual Operating Report 
submitted by the licensee. The lowest exposure value is for a year 
without a refueling outage and the highest value is for a year with a 
refueling outage. In section 5.9.1.1.1 of the FES, the average 
occupational exposure for a pressurized water reactor was reported as 
440 person-rems. Therefore, the expected annual occupational exposure 
for the proposed extended period of operation does not

[[Page 41408]]

change previous conclusions presented in the FES on occupational 
exposure.
    The offsite exposure from releases during routine operations has 
been previously evaluated in section 5.9.1 of the FES. During the low-
power license, the plant was restricted to no more than 5 percent of 
rated power and the generation of radioactivity at the plants was 
significantly smaller than would have occurred if the plants were at 
full-power operation. Therefore, the addition of approximately six to 
eight months of operation per plant that the licensee has requested 
does not change previous conclusions presented in the FES on annual 
public doses.
    The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability 
or consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in the types of 
effluents that may be released off site, and there is no significant 
increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there 
are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with 
the proposed action.
    With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed 
action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites. It does 
not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other 
environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant 
nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed 
action.
    Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.

Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered 
denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative). 
Denial of the application would result in no change in current 
environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action 
and the alternative action are similar.

Alternative Use of Resources

    The action does not involve the use of any different resource than 
those previously considered in the FES [or more recently, the 
Environmental Impact Statement] for the PVNGS, Units 1, 2, and 3.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    On July 3, 2003, the staff consulted with the Arizona State 
official, Mr. William Wright, of the Arizona Radiation Regulatory 
Agency, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The 
State official had no comments.

Finding of No Significant Impact

    On the basis of the environmental assessment, the NRC concludes 
that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the 
quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has determined 
not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed 
action.
    For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the 
licensee's letter dated August 28, 2002. Documents may be examined, 
and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), 
located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available 
records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents 
Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on 
the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter 
problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact 
the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-
4737, or by e-mail to [email protected].

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day of July 2003.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Stephen Dembek,
Chief, Section 2, Project Directorate IV, Division of Licensing Project 
Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 03-17579 Filed 7-10-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P